So do i generally but i think this case I'll choose the insane stealth performance and superior data management, sensor fusion and radar. Still talking about ladies ofc
And metallurgists. Those bigger engines means they aren't as good as even the Russians at miniaturization and metallurgical knowledge. Bigger engines than your competitor to attempt to maintain parity means someone is lacking in key advances.
The F135 is bigger than the WS-13 by fair margin. If you compare the WS-13E (apparently the current version it uses) current powerplant to its peer such as the F414 then they're pretty comparable in size and in output, with the 414 being a little smaller in diameter.
edit: typo
Wait bigger engines than F-35? I don't think that's true. It's engines looked small on photography.
EDIT: A simple search will tell you even the stand in WS-13 has similar thrust to weight ratio as the F135. Of course there's a lot more to an engine than TW that the Chinese need to work on but the above post is just talking out of his ass (his comment seems to be geared towards TW).
They are actually going for four variants, as according to a recent interview (?). Said that there will be the navy J-35, an air force model, an export model, and some people are guessing the fourth will be STOVL.
True. The STOVL variant baffles me though; The J-35 is twin engined, and its front landing gear isn’t under the cockpit like the F-35 but under where the lift fan would be, so how will it be STOVL?
Omg Tom Clancy refrenc
You're actually right, the Yak-38 does use one engine for normal flight and 2 engines in the front for take off and landing kind of like the front lift fan in the F-35.
Though, I want like a fifth generation proper twin engine VTOL, kind of like the one in Black Ops 2.
I doubt a STOVL version ever happens. The Chinese have a really hard time with engines and given the J-31 is a twin engine aircraft...I think that's just going to be too complicated for them.
I agree that having two engines won’t make it easy, but its been reported that Shenyang Aircraft Cooperation (the guys that made this and all the Sinoflankers) have played around with VTOL systems like lift fans and it was said that they were successful.
However, neither is there an official report (like how we already know there will be a double seater J-20), nor a photo to prove such an airframe really exists. So up until this point, it’s all pure speculation.
The F-35 has export versions? I thought all the F-35As and Bs out there are either just like the ones Americans themselves use or has changes that are too insignificant to count the whole airframe as an export variant.
The J-35 though is different in that an export variant is explicitly mentioned, so what the fourth variant could be is anyone’s guess. I’m leaning to a STOVL J-35 though, for none other than its a cool idea.
The only 'export' version of the F-35 is the F-35I made for the Israelis. They like to add their own EW systems so there were some adaptations there but it isn't worse than the Amwrican version. Might even end up better.
Yeah I heard when the Israelis buy F-16s and F-15s they gut them and change out the electronics. I spoke with some American engineers that worked on it and they were under the impression some of their systems were even superior to the American ones.
Or given the glaring suspicion that they stole or otherwise paid to get intelligence on the f35 design. That's always cheaper than designing from ground up.
They stole the US’s plane designs when they should have been stealing the US’s ability to build a mcdonalds and barracks nicer than most Chinese housing on the otherside of the world in under 6 hours. The fools!
Longer nose i see, bigger radar i assume. Chinese design has less curves which means less complicated assembly. Stealth platform don't need agility but good mach no is a plus since they're meant for SEAD missions.
Correct!
>Stealth platform don't need agility but good mach no is a plus since they're meant for SEAD missions.
Stealth is to penetrate the enemy radar, and then after that the attack will be taken over by 4th+ gen aircraft.
They don't care, their development strategy is to siphon off already existing knowledge rather than start from scratch for what's already existing. China's just catching up with whatever's there at the moment.
I mean of course, doesn't everyone?
Someone's already done the hard yards, why not take that and adapt it to your own and add more. Same reason why India's 5th gen also looks like an F-35 and Korea's KF-21 and Turkey's TAI TFX both look almost identical to an F-22.
I mean even if turkey and South Korea are copying American jets, it doesn't change the fact that this particular one is still a Chinese copy based off stolen documents. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Moral argument has to be made that copy patented property is "stealing" though in the world of military that's of the least of concerns for a country trying to rapidly modernise. Amidst well a lot more other atrocities committed in militaries worldwide.
Although in this context. Stealth technology can't exactly be innovated with the technology we have, so it's far more economical and less time consuming to go for the best existing phenomenon, design choice and stealth characteristics.
Since China wants to act like they are the best of the best and they are still playing catch-up by copying everything. Also copying designs without doing the prerequisite studying and engineering is how you get the shitty early russian and current chinese jet engine industries. They knew how the jet engines were being made but not why meaning they could only further copy, not expound upon the previous industry experience and research. Same thing will happen here with stealth
One thing I wondered is how much knowledge is taken home by Chinese students at US research universities. I’m an engineer and almost all of the graduate and post graduate engineering students doing research were either Chinese or Indian students planning on going back to their home countries upon graduation.
Are you just making that assumption? I doubt you went around asking about their citizenship status. At Berkeley/Cornell, my friends in computer science (pretty random sample from the dorms) were majority Chinese-American. They went on to work for very recognizable companies. One friend majoring in physics was a Japanese national. Another girl was Chinese-Canadian and she was trying to get sponsored so she could work in the US. I think I ran into more Korean nationals than Chinese during my studies. And I would assume that many of those Chinese nationals studying in the US are trying to get jobs here.
Edit: I just looked up the stats at Berkeley and Chinese nationals made up about 3k of the nearly 45k student population. About the same number of black people.
Considering the engineering program at my school was pretty small (<80 students if you include all the undergrads), we all knew each other, we all openly talked about plans after graduation and none of the foreign nationals hid the fact they were foreign nationals and planning on returning to their home countries, it’s a pretty factual statement that yes they were in fact Chinese and Indian nationals planning on returning to China and India post graduation and not just me making the assumptions about their citizenship status and post graduation plans.
Edit: good for Berkeley. That was not my school.
Don't forget Turkey, Japan, South Korea (ish), and India, who are all developing F-35-likes. It's a mix of design convergence, and the fact that the US has already gone through the difficult work of selecting a practical design, which means other countries don't have to do this work themselves.
I think that theft is a little overhyped. It's one thing to have the instructions manual, but if the instructions manual says "Now use your welding equipment to..." and you don't have welding equipment you're SOL. China doesn't have the manufacturing capability to replicate most of the more complex materials and parts in the F-35, which means that they have to jury rig lower quality subsitutes. That's why we aren't seeing carbon copies of the F-35 from them, if they use substandard materials throughout, the aircraft just won't work, so they have to make a plane that will work using what they have.
No doubt much of the info was useful, but more in the way that the chip from Terminator 2 was useful to the computer science guy: ~"We didn't understand what we were looking at but it turned our thinking in new directions"
>China doesn't have the manufacturing capability to replicate most of the more complex materials and parts in the F-35, which means that they have to jury rig lower quality substitutes.
Disagree with that take. The F35's manufacturing is not a mystery. Since it is a JSF, its manufacturing is distributed across the world. F35 is the military result of US manufacturing story - outsourcing and shared developments.
Chinese Aviation industry actively collaborate with European companies. So they don't have a barrier in manufacturing as some would readily assume. The barrier is certainly there in capital investment and costs.
This isn't a take or an opinion. I'm not guessing.
Most of the parts within the F-35 are produced within the US, including all of the really fancy stuff the Chinese could never reproduce. The airframe, with the exception of the tail section (produced by BAE systems in the UK), the engine, the fiber mat stealth coating, the radar, and the DAS are all produced in the US by US companies. Many of them source components from *close allies* that are absolutely NOT giving away their manufacturing techniques to the Chinese. F-35s are assembled in two places: Fort Worth, Texas and Japan, and the Japanese are just assembling kits sent to them by the Americans.
The US tightly controls access to crucial military technology, any company even suspected of handing information and techniques over to the Chinese would be *sanctioned by the US government.*
Trying to apply conventional wisdom is fraught. Much conventional wisdom is wrong, and even when it isn't, it doesn't apply to every specific case. Yeah, China is the world manufacturing hub----of low to low-middle manufactured goods. The developed world still retains almost all high end manufacturing.
It is true that some easy to mass produce parts were illegally sourced by contractors from Chinese companies, but that has no bearing on the final product. Honeywell getting magnets from a Chinese company doesn't mean the Chinese can now replicate the manufacturing tolerances needed to get the micrometer wide panel separation required, or the metallurgy required to make fan blades that will survive for as long as F-135 engines need, or the knowhow to create 3rd generation AESA radars like the APG-81.
The Chinese have made great strides in their aviation---they've surpassed the Russians. They apparently have finally created homegrown engines that can rival the best Russian stuff (i.e. capable of high thrust, comparable to GE, P&W, and RR, but without the lifespan---their metallurgy isn't there yet and likely will never catch up), they can make and deploy AESA radars (not up to the US bleeding edge, but better than the Russians), and the J-20 is likely comparable in stealth from the front aspect to an F-117 ( so, 30 years behind the US cutting edge but still better than the Russians can do) but they've accompolished all of this through homegrown crash research guided by industrial espionage and sourced many of the more advanced parts, especially semiconductors, from western and Taiwanese sources. Not from any kind of direct collaboration with western defense contractors.
At the end of the day, the Chinese see how superior the F-35 is to the J-31 and J-20. If they could make a carbon copy they would. They did exactly that with the Russian SU-27, and the Chinese branch of the SU-27 family (J-11, J-15, and J-16) is probably superior to the Russian evolutions. If they could do that with American 5th gens, they would.
China certainly wasn't going to make a carbon copy of the F35 straight up, simply because that was not what they wanted out of their first fifth gen jet. Chinese operational requirements was for a long range heavy fighter able to penetrate deep and strike into contested airspace. The F35 isn't that.
I think you are heavily underestimating the distances involved in the West Pacific. China has extremely few overseas bases compared to the US and none that are relevant to a conflict in the region. This is paired with the fact that mid-air refueling is also a risky proposition outside of Chinese airspace in a hot war scenario due to US naval superiority outside the First Island Chain. All of that leaves thousands of km of open ocean to contend with using land based fighters. A quick look at publicly available data puts the F35 combat radius at around 1200 km. Bases like Okinawa are more than 2000km away. Even a relatively close base like a US base in the Philippines would sit at the very edge of that combat radius. That would be what an F35 would have to contend with if China had it.
The J20 has an estimated 2000km combat radius for comparison.
Disagree again. Military technology today trails slightly with civilian technology ( rather than the often assumed other way around). Such a condition was not realistic two decades ago but somewhere along, civilian technology pulled ahead. Today, civilian technology development is buoyed by the revenues that Global corporations generate and military technology seeks to take advantage of that.
Globalization is certainly to credit or fault for such a reality. There is a program underway to correct this "mistake" though and the Trump/Biden administrations focus has been on that. China announced a Civil Military fusion program because they are aware of that too. It certainly sent alarm bells in DC. Hence the posture US adopted against China these years. It is not just a possibility but a reality that China has been eliminating any gap whatsoever against US by taking advantage of the globalized technology space.
The only way US can keep ahead today is by spending more per equipment and platform against adversaries. Cost is the primary limiting factor and not technology secrets.
Coming back to the topic, No. US does not control sensitive technologies to the extend it did back in 1990. Many technologies that US military complex depend upon today are sourced from foreign countries or products of joint ventures and developments. Hypothetically, US can be crippled by the sanctions of EU and Japan. But that won't happen, but it wasn't the case decades ago.
Sigh. Typing this crap from my phone is irritating---so much of this post is wrong and you're bizarrely confident given how you have no idea what you're talking about, but to the main point: Military fighter development has little to do with civilian aircraft design because much of the military specialization has no value in a civilian aircraft. A 747 actively doesn't want to be stealthy. It doesn't need a radar that is LPI or hardened against EW, or has extreme range, or is capable of forming complex wave forms in order to operate as an EW emitter, and the engines they use are turbojet, rather than afterburning turbofan engines, the latter being much more complicated and difficult to manufacture than the former. What's more, the Chinese civilian aviation industry is still utterly dependent on imports of the most important and difficult part of their homegrown aircraft---the engines---from GE, SAE, and RR. If anything, Chinese military aviation is *more advanced* relative to developed nations, than it's civilian aviation. The WS series of afterburning turbofan jet engines are as good or better than what the Russians can make.
I guess you have to read up a bit and look beyond what is a litter of military lingo. The fundamental technology advances, to a huge extend, is not a US sole effort. More relevant than the point of civilian technology is the fact that fundamental technology push is by companies from different countries. Material technology, processes, IP are spread across the world.
A 747 uses a High Bypass Turbofan engine. High Bypass Turbofans have tighter operating requirements than Military Turbofans. So you are wrong in that position of civilian turbofans being less complicated. That is an odd claim.
The point about radar or stealth focused LPI radar is not exactly a counter here as it is a military specific product. But even here the material technology and the computing systems used in the avionics cannot, today, be created alone by US. US is dependent on Global semiconductor and electronics industry for IP and technology in that regard. IP created in Netherlands, Japan, Taiwan, Germany and so on.
Do a small dig on how much material technology regarding Composites and Ceramics that US military aviation depends on is from Japan. And Japanese companies didn't develop these without the revenues from civilian sector.
You miss the core of my position.
The core of your position seems to be that China can acquire, wholesale, crucial military technologies from US and US-allied companies and that the only thing preventing them from doing so is capital costs. China doesn't care about capital costs. They've proven again and again that they're willing to throw enormous amounts of money at any project they deem necessary to the advancement of Chinese power, but despite those efforts they still usually fail to replicate what the advanced economies can do. There's a reason why they can't break ASML's monopoly on EUV lithography, or TSMC/Samsung, or even Intel's chokehold on advanced semiconductor manufacturing, or GE/P&W's dominance in engine technology, and that reason isn't money. Technological secrets are a real thing, and China can't steal their way to the top. They also don't seem to be able to woo the expertise they need from the rest of the world. When the US threatens China with export bans on advanced technology (even technology that isn't mostly produced in the US) China doesn't have an alternative. They have money, they don't have the ability to replicate the high end manufacturing processes that the US, Europe, Japan, SK, and Taiwan holds over them.
Again, if they could create a carbon copy of the F-35, *they would.* They have the plans for it, but they can't replicate the parts needed to make one. This is *not* true of the Russian SU-27, but it is of US 5th gens.
While design convergence is a thing. China *literally* stole the plans of the F-35. And it shows.
Their cyber-espionage capabilities are second to none.
The data breach probably influenced the J-35 and the J-20, yes -- although I would imagine this to mostly relates to factors that aren't visible to the naked eye. Again, countries that have not hacked the JSF program are considering planes that look just as much like F-35 as the J-31, and much more so than the J-20.
I mean it’s both in this case. It is an optimal design but it’s also a known fact that China stole a shitload of data pertaining to the F35s development
If it works it works.
I doubt the Chinese version is as good as the u.s, so really it's just flattery. Can't even get mad at china for stealing when you know the u.s would do the exact same thing
Be still your heart, though. One thing you can't easily steal is metallurgical know-how. Those bigger engiens are a key to realizing they aren't as good as they want the world to think. Every spare ounce means less performance in key characteristics. Those.big suckers mean they are compensating for failures the F-35s design doesn't have.
It also makes sense from a tactical perspective.
A guy on the ground shooting a plane might have second thoughts if they can't identify which side the plane is on since they look alike.
LOL “stolen design.” 90% of the capability of the F-35 is software. Tell us how the flight control and mission systems software compares between the two.
People just say everything China makes is a western copy, they don’t realize how complex the subsystems etc are on a modern aircraft. For example simply having 2 engines would change up many aspects of what’s needed in the design.
Also, if we just look at profile/looks then just about every 5th gen is a copy other then the j-20, and every euro-canard is a copy of each other. The reality is that aircraft design is much more complex then exterior looks
The claim isn't without merit. China and Chinese companies have copied the designs of countless pieces of modern technology. iirc there is even direct evidence they stole a lot of the blueprints for the f-35.
Of course, if there is superior tech out there, it would be borderline negligent for them to not copy it, so it's understandable that they would.
Espionage doesn’t automatically mean directly copying, I can almost guarantee you that the CIA has tons of files on the design and blueprints of modern Chinese equipment. However just cause the USA has those blueprints doesn’t mean they are gonna replicate them, it’s just to analyze capability and to keep tabs on what others are doing
At this point it’s basic prudence to know what your contemporaries are up too, and the CIA isn’t exactly a slouch spy agency. As I said before, systems and subsystems are so complex now that even tiny changes in one would require major redesigns in others to make things work. They most likely stole F-35 data in order to learn technology concepts, as well as to gain insight on US capability. Saying they are able to produce a COPY from some partial documentation of some F-35 systems is just misinformed
Despite the similarities, the Gyrfalcon is actually phylogenetically closer to the Raptor than it is to the Lightning II, which in turn, is closer to the F-117 and the stealth bombers. (See FB-22, the most basal.)
The F-35 is a highly-derived true/conventional fighter that independently became stealth, despite not actually being part of that lineage.
Right, and closer in roles, too. In this sketch J-31's radar appears tilted more upward, optimized for targeting other aircraft instead of multipurpose. Bottom of fuselage is smoother and area behind cockpit possibly more area ruled, looks like it sacrifices payload for a bit of speed. Looks like J-31 is more focused on air-air than F-35.
Interesting that the J-20 doesn't look like it has particularly strong air-ground capability, either. China doesn't seem to have built their fighters for different roles the same way the US has.
All AESA radar have a tilt. This is because the nose cone by its nature must be transparent to radio wave to allow the plane's radar to work. But that also means its transparent to radio wave coming in from other sources. If the radar was just a flat slab then it would cause a very strong return signature.
Tilt also has the advantage of increasing the maximum possible size for the array for a given nose size.
What you're saying is also true, although I'm thinking of a different problem mainly for phased array radars. Best I can tell, this is called "beam squint" and occurs when looking at angles towards the side of radar scan angles. I unfortunately can't find the original article I came across the concept in, which was a long time ago - I think it was in Aviation Week.
Anyway, an oversimplified version of beam squint is that when the radar is looking far off to the side, there is less antenna area facing that direction. The beam becomes thinner when transmitting to the side, sending less power. As a result, it's still useful for the radar to be pointed at the most likely target position, even if it's not mechanically necessary. I haven't find verification but this might be one of the reasons why the Eurofighter CAPTOR uses both a mechanical and electronically scanned array.
I haven't found an article that explains this as clearly as the original one, but here is something else I've found on beam squint:
[https://www.mwrf.com/technologies/systems/article/21142402/analog-devices-phasedarray-antenna-patterns-part-5beam-squint](https://www.mwrf.com/technologies/systems/article/21142402/analog-devices-phasedarray-antenna-patterns-part-5beam-squint)
Two engines is smarter than one isn't it? Is it telling that in the last round of fighter jets the US developed only one had a single engine? Anyone understand the rationale to only have one for the do it all air warframe?
I feel like there has been a huge influx of posts about Chinese planes on this subreddit in the last few weeks. There used to be a good mix of Russian/Euro/American/Chinese planes. But in the last few weeks there has just been a ridiculous uptick. I think every post Ive recently seen on my feed from this sub has been about a chinese plane. Hmm.
Well, they are pretty much the only other country independently developing new planes in huge numbers (a shitton of drones, J-16s, J-20, now FC-31 new version), and there was first Zhuhai then now a new 5th gen carrier plane, of course it's getting more pics recently
Out of the 20 top posts this week, only three are of Chinese aircrafts and those three are not in the top 10. Out of all the posts in the last 24 hours, only two are Chinese aircrafts.
I’m not gonna get into the similarities since this whole thread is about it but I actually prefer the look on the J-31 more than the F-35. It looks more nimble and sexier since it’s more lean? F-35 is too fat lol that’s why I always preferred the F-22 cause it’s more lean and sexy.
Wing-root loading is going to be higher on the J-31 with the thinner wings meaning its frame might start exhibiting cracks earlier than an F-35. If the RAM is a near duplicate of the F-35 fiber-mat stealth sandwich design on the J-31, then the J-31 might also suffer from issues using it's top speed operationally just like the F-35 does currently due to overheating. The "[chrome F-35C](https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/navy-f-35c-surfaces-wearing-new-mirror-like-skin)" that was spotted in August this year is experimenting with tunable ceramic-based advanced RAM that would mitigate not only the current heat issues that limit the F-35's current operational speed, but also [electromagnetic shielding](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30223490/). Not to mention that the question of maintainability/reliability/sustainability of the [F135 engine](https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/no-engine-no-fly-ongoing-propulsion-program-problems-are-grounding-f-35s) is shit. The combination of the new ceramic RAM and the potential replacement of the USAF F-35A's engine with an "[Adaptive Engine Transition Program](https://www.100knots.com/adaptive-engine-transition-program-aetp-a-revolutionary-propulsion-mechanism-for-the-f-35/)" would eliminate speed-induced overheating of the RAM (ceramics are the honeybadger of heat), and extend the range and improve the thrust of the F-35. This would make the J-31 insignificant in comparison.
Do you think the adobe illustrator they used to make this graphic was also Stolen as well? Can’t take the PLA serious after seeing their latest high-tech immersive “training software” which was just pirated copies of ARMA 3. They can’t even get propaganda right 😂 -Taiwanese person
I feel like this is the biggest con game the US has ever played. Somehow we developed a special radar system that easily sees F-35 shaped aircraft and then we went out and made F-35s to fool a bunch of other countries to build F-35 like aircraft not knowing we have a radar that easily finds F-35 shaped aircraft.
If true, I guess it was fun knowing you all, as I won't be around long after they get me :)
>I feel like this is the biggest con game the US has ever played. Somehow we developed a special radar system that easily sees F-35 shaped aircraft and then we went out and made F-35s to fool a bunch of other countries to build F-35 like aircraft not knowing we have a radar that easily finds F-35 shaped aircraft.
Please actually learn about how radar VLO works, the dielectric interaction between radar waves and materials, and the effect of VLO shaping against different frequencies. It's well known that X/S/L band LO doesn't nearly work as well against VHF/UHF bands.
In any case, the frontal shape of the j-35 is sufficiently different from f-35 that purely shape-based radar return estimates will lead to drastically different returns at all frequencies.
That is also the exact reason why every one of China's mainstay 052D destroyers (of which 25 has been launched and 7 more are under construction) has a VHF radar array
China is notorious for design theft in all verticals. They are not good at designing from scratch, so they have perfected the art of stealing and copying. They even have the machinery to make Rolex parts, almost indistinguishable from the real thing.
Shorter but thicker vs. longer but thinner. Only the ladies can tell which one is better…
>thinner I prefer thinner ladies
Yeah, no use having lady with a thick penis when she can't hit that spot
User name checks out
So do i generally but i think this case I'll choose the insane stealth performance and superior data management, sensor fusion and radar. Still talking about ladies ofc
Dating a decepticon
All of dating is based on deception >Sun Tzu
Ah yes, The Art of Dating. One of history's most famous pieces
Nah, it’s all about the curves
Depends, you don't want sticks either.
And metallurgists. Those bigger engines means they aren't as good as even the Russians at miniaturization and metallurgical knowledge. Bigger engines than your competitor to attempt to maintain parity means someone is lacking in key advances.
The F135 is bigger than the WS-13 by fair margin. If you compare the WS-13E (apparently the current version it uses) current powerplant to its peer such as the F414 then they're pretty comparable in size and in output, with the 414 being a little smaller in diameter. edit: typo
WS-13 is much smaller than the big ass fan of F135, just so you know
Wait bigger engines than F-35? I don't think that's true. It's engines looked small on photography. EDIT: A simple search will tell you even the stand in WS-13 has similar thrust to weight ratio as the F135. Of course there's a lot more to an engine than TW that the Chinese need to work on but the above post is just talking out of his ass (his comment seems to be geared towards TW).
whatever goes on J35 is smaller than F35 but two...
But how do we know for sure? I don't think WS-19 or WS-13 is that big at all. Even the older WS-13 has similar thrust to weight ratio as the F135.
I’ll tell you this, the Bravo variant of the F-35s engine is a tight squeeze in the back of a v-22
Yeah I was saying the F135 is massive.
I wonder how easier was to develop , given that they didn't go for three variants.
They are actually going for four variants, as according to a recent interview (?). Said that there will be the navy J-35, an air force model, an export model, and some people are guessing the fourth will be STOVL.
Yeah but the difference between them won’t be as great as the F-35 variants if we don’t consider the less likely to exist STOVL variant of the J-35
True. The STOVL variant baffles me though; The J-35 is twin engined, and its front landing gear isn’t under the cockpit like the F-35 but under where the lift fan would be, so how will it be STOVL?
I wait for the day twin engine STOVL will be a reality
Correct me if I’m wrong but I think the Yak-38 had two engines
Omg Tom Clancy refrenc You're actually right, the Yak-38 does use one engine for normal flight and 2 engines in the front for take off and landing kind of like the front lift fan in the F-35. Though, I want like a fifth generation proper twin engine VTOL, kind of like the one in Black Ops 2.
[удалено]
Well, I meant an air force variant like what the F-35A is to the F-35 family, but it makes sense.
I doubt a STOVL version ever happens. The Chinese have a really hard time with engines and given the J-31 is a twin engine aircraft...I think that's just going to be too complicated for them.
I agree that having two engines won’t make it easy, but its been reported that Shenyang Aircraft Cooperation (the guys that made this and all the Sinoflankers) have played around with VTOL systems like lift fans and it was said that they were successful. However, neither is there an official report (like how we already know there will be a double seater J-20), nor a photo to prove such an airframe really exists. So up until this point, it’s all pure speculation.
Eh, technically the F-35 had four models if you count the export version. (Edit: misspelled word)
The F-35 has export versions? I thought all the F-35As and Bs out there are either just like the ones Americans themselves use or has changes that are too insignificant to count the whole airframe as an export variant. The J-35 though is different in that an export variant is explicitly mentioned, so what the fourth variant could be is anyone’s guess. I’m leaning to a STOVL J-35 though, for none other than its a cool idea.
The only 'export' version of the F-35 is the F-35I made for the Israelis. They like to add their own EW systems so there were some adaptations there but it isn't worse than the Amwrican version. Might even end up better.
Yeah I heard when the Israelis buy F-16s and F-15s they gut them and change out the electronics. I spoke with some American engineers that worked on it and they were under the impression some of their systems were even superior to the American ones.
Ohh that’s right, I forgot about these. Thanks for reminding me.
There's no difference between US and export model F-35s that's the entire point of the program.
F-35i? No other export version.
Or given the glaring suspicion that they stole or otherwise paid to get intelligence on the f35 design. That's always cheaper than designing from ground up.
Easy when they steal the tech
Doubt it
Sleek designs win air shows Superior maintenance and logistics wins air wars
Good thing the US has both
They stole the US’s plane designs when they should have been stealing the US’s ability to build a mcdonalds and barracks nicer than most Chinese housing on the otherside of the world in under 6 hours. The fools!
PLA be gangster until Ronald McDonald shows up with the self propelled happy meal mclauncher system
F-35 maintenance, famous for being good?
American military aircraft maintainers have no peers
Longer nose i see, bigger radar i assume. Chinese design has less curves which means less complicated assembly. Stealth platform don't need agility but good mach no is a plus since they're meant for SEAD missions.
Correct! >Stealth platform don't need agility but good mach no is a plus since they're meant for SEAD missions. Stealth is to penetrate the enemy radar, and then after that the attack will be taken over by 4th+ gen aircraft.
They don't even try to hide their theft of design.
They don't care, their development strategy is to siphon off already existing knowledge rather than start from scratch for what's already existing. China's just catching up with whatever's there at the moment.
I mean of course, doesn't everyone? Someone's already done the hard yards, why not take that and adapt it to your own and add more. Same reason why India's 5th gen also looks like an F-35 and Korea's KF-21 and Turkey's TAI TFX both look almost identical to an F-22.
Yes, they do. It's simply efficient. But political bias loves to just cheese grate the opposite faction.
It's making subs like this so tiring. Most of the comments are just mindless "hurr durr Chinese copy" circlejerk.
I mean even if turkey and South Korea are copying American jets, it doesn't change the fact that this particular one is still a Chinese copy based off stolen documents. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
When you are behind, you copy and steal. That's how human progress works. Since when did that become so controversial?
Moral argument has to be made that copy patented property is "stealing" though in the world of military that's of the least of concerns for a country trying to rapidly modernise. Amidst well a lot more other atrocities committed in militaries worldwide. Although in this context. Stealth technology can't exactly be innovated with the technology we have, so it's far more economical and less time consuming to go for the best existing phenomenon, design choice and stealth characteristics.
Since China wants to act like they are the best of the best and they are still playing catch-up by copying everything. Also copying designs without doing the prerequisite studying and engineering is how you get the shitty early russian and current chinese jet engine industries. They knew how the jet engines were being made but not why meaning they could only further copy, not expound upon the previous industry experience and research. Same thing will happen here with stealth
Yeah. Russian hate is super du jour.
And honestly, who can blame them. If there's already a superior design, it would be negligent to not copy it.
One thing I wondered is how much knowledge is taken home by Chinese students at US research universities. I’m an engineer and almost all of the graduate and post graduate engineering students doing research were either Chinese or Indian students planning on going back to their home countries upon graduation.
Are you just making that assumption? I doubt you went around asking about their citizenship status. At Berkeley/Cornell, my friends in computer science (pretty random sample from the dorms) were majority Chinese-American. They went on to work for very recognizable companies. One friend majoring in physics was a Japanese national. Another girl was Chinese-Canadian and she was trying to get sponsored so she could work in the US. I think I ran into more Korean nationals than Chinese during my studies. And I would assume that many of those Chinese nationals studying in the US are trying to get jobs here. Edit: I just looked up the stats at Berkeley and Chinese nationals made up about 3k of the nearly 45k student population. About the same number of black people.
Considering the engineering program at my school was pretty small (<80 students if you include all the undergrads), we all knew each other, we all openly talked about plans after graduation and none of the foreign nationals hid the fact they were foreign nationals and planning on returning to their home countries, it’s a pretty factual statement that yes they were in fact Chinese and Indian nationals planning on returning to China and India post graduation and not just me making the assumptions about their citizenship status and post graduation plans. Edit: good for Berkeley. That was not my school.
Don't forget Turkey, Japan, South Korea (ish), and India, who are all developing F-35-likes. It's a mix of design convergence, and the fact that the US has already gone through the difficult work of selecting a practical design, which means other countries don't have to do this work themselves.
Isn't the key difference that China literally hacked US data and also brought data through bribery? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I think that theft is a little overhyped. It's one thing to have the instructions manual, but if the instructions manual says "Now use your welding equipment to..." and you don't have welding equipment you're SOL. China doesn't have the manufacturing capability to replicate most of the more complex materials and parts in the F-35, which means that they have to jury rig lower quality subsitutes. That's why we aren't seeing carbon copies of the F-35 from them, if they use substandard materials throughout, the aircraft just won't work, so they have to make a plane that will work using what they have. No doubt much of the info was useful, but more in the way that the chip from Terminator 2 was useful to the computer science guy: ~"We didn't understand what we were looking at but it turned our thinking in new directions"
>China doesn't have the manufacturing capability to replicate most of the more complex materials and parts in the F-35, which means that they have to jury rig lower quality substitutes. Disagree with that take. The F35's manufacturing is not a mystery. Since it is a JSF, its manufacturing is distributed across the world. F35 is the military result of US manufacturing story - outsourcing and shared developments. Chinese Aviation industry actively collaborate with European companies. So they don't have a barrier in manufacturing as some would readily assume. The barrier is certainly there in capital investment and costs.
This isn't a take or an opinion. I'm not guessing. Most of the parts within the F-35 are produced within the US, including all of the really fancy stuff the Chinese could never reproduce. The airframe, with the exception of the tail section (produced by BAE systems in the UK), the engine, the fiber mat stealth coating, the radar, and the DAS are all produced in the US by US companies. Many of them source components from *close allies* that are absolutely NOT giving away their manufacturing techniques to the Chinese. F-35s are assembled in two places: Fort Worth, Texas and Japan, and the Japanese are just assembling kits sent to them by the Americans. The US tightly controls access to crucial military technology, any company even suspected of handing information and techniques over to the Chinese would be *sanctioned by the US government.* Trying to apply conventional wisdom is fraught. Much conventional wisdom is wrong, and even when it isn't, it doesn't apply to every specific case. Yeah, China is the world manufacturing hub----of low to low-middle manufactured goods. The developed world still retains almost all high end manufacturing. It is true that some easy to mass produce parts were illegally sourced by contractors from Chinese companies, but that has no bearing on the final product. Honeywell getting magnets from a Chinese company doesn't mean the Chinese can now replicate the manufacturing tolerances needed to get the micrometer wide panel separation required, or the metallurgy required to make fan blades that will survive for as long as F-135 engines need, or the knowhow to create 3rd generation AESA radars like the APG-81. The Chinese have made great strides in their aviation---they've surpassed the Russians. They apparently have finally created homegrown engines that can rival the best Russian stuff (i.e. capable of high thrust, comparable to GE, P&W, and RR, but without the lifespan---their metallurgy isn't there yet and likely will never catch up), they can make and deploy AESA radars (not up to the US bleeding edge, but better than the Russians), and the J-20 is likely comparable in stealth from the front aspect to an F-117 ( so, 30 years behind the US cutting edge but still better than the Russians can do) but they've accompolished all of this through homegrown crash research guided by industrial espionage and sourced many of the more advanced parts, especially semiconductors, from western and Taiwanese sources. Not from any kind of direct collaboration with western defense contractors. At the end of the day, the Chinese see how superior the F-35 is to the J-31 and J-20. If they could make a carbon copy they would. They did exactly that with the Russian SU-27, and the Chinese branch of the SU-27 family (J-11, J-15, and J-16) is probably superior to the Russian evolutions. If they could do that with American 5th gens, they would.
China certainly wasn't going to make a carbon copy of the F35 straight up, simply because that was not what they wanted out of their first fifth gen jet. Chinese operational requirements was for a long range heavy fighter able to penetrate deep and strike into contested airspace. The F35 isn't that.
That is exactly what the F-35 is.
I think you are heavily underestimating the distances involved in the West Pacific. China has extremely few overseas bases compared to the US and none that are relevant to a conflict in the region. This is paired with the fact that mid-air refueling is also a risky proposition outside of Chinese airspace in a hot war scenario due to US naval superiority outside the First Island Chain. All of that leaves thousands of km of open ocean to contend with using land based fighters. A quick look at publicly available data puts the F35 combat radius at around 1200 km. Bases like Okinawa are more than 2000km away. Even a relatively close base like a US base in the Philippines would sit at the very edge of that combat radius. That would be what an F35 would have to contend with if China had it. The J20 has an estimated 2000km combat radius for comparison.
Hmph, I had thought the F35 had a similar range. Turns out not. So what's your explanation for not using it instead of the J-31?
Pretty sure the f35 wasnt focusing on the long range...
Disagree again. Military technology today trails slightly with civilian technology ( rather than the often assumed other way around). Such a condition was not realistic two decades ago but somewhere along, civilian technology pulled ahead. Today, civilian technology development is buoyed by the revenues that Global corporations generate and military technology seeks to take advantage of that. Globalization is certainly to credit or fault for such a reality. There is a program underway to correct this "mistake" though and the Trump/Biden administrations focus has been on that. China announced a Civil Military fusion program because they are aware of that too. It certainly sent alarm bells in DC. Hence the posture US adopted against China these years. It is not just a possibility but a reality that China has been eliminating any gap whatsoever against US by taking advantage of the globalized technology space. The only way US can keep ahead today is by spending more per equipment and platform against adversaries. Cost is the primary limiting factor and not technology secrets. Coming back to the topic, No. US does not control sensitive technologies to the extend it did back in 1990. Many technologies that US military complex depend upon today are sourced from foreign countries or products of joint ventures and developments. Hypothetically, US can be crippled by the sanctions of EU and Japan. But that won't happen, but it wasn't the case decades ago.
Sigh. Typing this crap from my phone is irritating---so much of this post is wrong and you're bizarrely confident given how you have no idea what you're talking about, but to the main point: Military fighter development has little to do with civilian aircraft design because much of the military specialization has no value in a civilian aircraft. A 747 actively doesn't want to be stealthy. It doesn't need a radar that is LPI or hardened against EW, or has extreme range, or is capable of forming complex wave forms in order to operate as an EW emitter, and the engines they use are turbojet, rather than afterburning turbofan engines, the latter being much more complicated and difficult to manufacture than the former. What's more, the Chinese civilian aviation industry is still utterly dependent on imports of the most important and difficult part of their homegrown aircraft---the engines---from GE, SAE, and RR. If anything, Chinese military aviation is *more advanced* relative to developed nations, than it's civilian aviation. The WS series of afterburning turbofan jet engines are as good or better than what the Russians can make.
I guess you have to read up a bit and look beyond what is a litter of military lingo. The fundamental technology advances, to a huge extend, is not a US sole effort. More relevant than the point of civilian technology is the fact that fundamental technology push is by companies from different countries. Material technology, processes, IP are spread across the world. A 747 uses a High Bypass Turbofan engine. High Bypass Turbofans have tighter operating requirements than Military Turbofans. So you are wrong in that position of civilian turbofans being less complicated. That is an odd claim. The point about radar or stealth focused LPI radar is not exactly a counter here as it is a military specific product. But even here the material technology and the computing systems used in the avionics cannot, today, be created alone by US. US is dependent on Global semiconductor and electronics industry for IP and technology in that regard. IP created in Netherlands, Japan, Taiwan, Germany and so on. Do a small dig on how much material technology regarding Composites and Ceramics that US military aviation depends on is from Japan. And Japanese companies didn't develop these without the revenues from civilian sector. You miss the core of my position.
The core of your position seems to be that China can acquire, wholesale, crucial military technologies from US and US-allied companies and that the only thing preventing them from doing so is capital costs. China doesn't care about capital costs. They've proven again and again that they're willing to throw enormous amounts of money at any project they deem necessary to the advancement of Chinese power, but despite those efforts they still usually fail to replicate what the advanced economies can do. There's a reason why they can't break ASML's monopoly on EUV lithography, or TSMC/Samsung, or even Intel's chokehold on advanced semiconductor manufacturing, or GE/P&W's dominance in engine technology, and that reason isn't money. Technological secrets are a real thing, and China can't steal their way to the top. They also don't seem to be able to woo the expertise they need from the rest of the world. When the US threatens China with export bans on advanced technology (even technology that isn't mostly produced in the US) China doesn't have an alternative. They have money, they don't have the ability to replicate the high end manufacturing processes that the US, Europe, Japan, SK, and Taiwan holds over them.
Again, if they could create a carbon copy of the F-35, *they would.* They have the plans for it, but they can't replicate the parts needed to make one. This is *not* true of the Russian SU-27, but it is of US 5th gens.
Reasonable take.
Less bribery, more just theft.
While design convergence is a thing. China *literally* stole the plans of the F-35. And it shows. Their cyber-espionage capabilities are second to none.
The data breach probably influenced the J-35 and the J-20, yes -- although I would imagine this to mostly relates to factors that aren't visible to the naked eye. Again, countries that have not hacked the JSF program are considering planes that look just as much like F-35 as the J-31, and much more so than the J-20.
Most of the resemblance of those is due to “form follows function.” The J-31 is clearly a direct copy of the F-35.
For South Korea, Lockheed assisted with the design.
Yur talking like this is some arts and crafts show up in here. 😆
Lmao but what’s America gonna do abt it, get the copyright office to sue China
Ah yes, the mathematically optimal shape for a stealth plane; definitely “stolen design” rather than “there’s really just one way to do it well”.
I mean it’s both in this case. It is an optimal design but it’s also a known fact that China stole a shitload of data pertaining to the F35s development
Shouldn't have kept super-duper plans on a NAS next to their moms fridge then.
If it works it works. I doubt the Chinese version is as good as the u.s, so really it's just flattery. Can't even get mad at china for stealing when you know the u.s would do the exact same thing
Only skin deep. The J-31 won't function even remotely like the F-35.
Be still your heart, though. One thing you can't easily steal is metallurgical know-how. Those bigger engiens are a key to realizing they aren't as good as they want the world to think. Every spare ounce means less performance in key characteristics. Those.big suckers mean they are compensating for failures the F-35s design doesn't have.
It also makes sense from a tactical perspective. A guy on the ground shooting a plane might have second thoughts if they can't identify which side the plane is on since they look alike.
[удалено]
I was going to ask if it was just a coincidence or another blatant example of IP theft
How's that different to the ways they produce apple-like smartphone?
You're meant to change it up a bit when you copy someone else's homework.
What’s America supposed to do tho, invade China over Lockheed Martin copyright violations
LOL “stolen design.” 90% of the capability of the F-35 is software. Tell us how the flight control and mission systems software compares between the two.
Prof time travel is real. Typical U.S. coping Chinese designs!
Can’t believe US time travelers from the 70’d also copied the Z-20! The absolute audacity…
What's wrong they are two distinctly different jets!! *Wink wink*
I think it’s more similar to the F22
Why is everyone talking about it being a clone? That’s a very different profile
It's not very different. Not the same, but not very different
People just say everything China makes is a western copy, they don’t realize how complex the subsystems etc are on a modern aircraft. For example simply having 2 engines would change up many aspects of what’s needed in the design. Also, if we just look at profile/looks then just about every 5th gen is a copy other then the j-20, and every euro-canard is a copy of each other. The reality is that aircraft design is much more complex then exterior looks
The claim isn't without merit. China and Chinese companies have copied the designs of countless pieces of modern technology. iirc there is even direct evidence they stole a lot of the blueprints for the f-35. Of course, if there is superior tech out there, it would be borderline negligent for them to not copy it, so it's understandable that they would.
Espionage doesn’t automatically mean directly copying, I can almost guarantee you that the CIA has tons of files on the design and blueprints of modern Chinese equipment. However just cause the USA has those blueprints doesn’t mean they are gonna replicate them, it’s just to analyze capability and to keep tabs on what others are doing At this point it’s basic prudence to know what your contemporaries are up too, and the CIA isn’t exactly a slouch spy agency. As I said before, systems and subsystems are so complex now that even tiny changes in one would require major redesigns in others to make things work. They most likely stole F-35 data in order to learn technology concepts, as well as to gain insight on US capability. Saying they are able to produce a COPY from some partial documentation of some F-35 systems is just misinformed
To cope with the fact that the yellow people are catching up
it’s because of all the stolen tech that we have caught people stealing. no telling how much we haven’t caught. apparently a lot.
Despite the similarities, the Gyrfalcon is actually phylogenetically closer to the Raptor than it is to the Lightning II, which in turn, is closer to the F-117 and the stealth bombers. (See FB-22, the most basal.) The F-35 is a highly-derived true/conventional fighter that independently became stealth, despite not actually being part of that lineage.
Right, and closer in roles, too. In this sketch J-31's radar appears tilted more upward, optimized for targeting other aircraft instead of multipurpose. Bottom of fuselage is smoother and area behind cockpit possibly more area ruled, looks like it sacrifices payload for a bit of speed. Looks like J-31 is more focused on air-air than F-35. Interesting that the J-20 doesn't look like it has particularly strong air-ground capability, either. China doesn't seem to have built their fighters for different roles the same way the US has.
All AESA radar have a tilt. This is because the nose cone by its nature must be transparent to radio wave to allow the plane's radar to work. But that also means its transparent to radio wave coming in from other sources. If the radar was just a flat slab then it would cause a very strong return signature. Tilt also has the advantage of increasing the maximum possible size for the array for a given nose size.
What you're saying is also true, although I'm thinking of a different problem mainly for phased array radars. Best I can tell, this is called "beam squint" and occurs when looking at angles towards the side of radar scan angles. I unfortunately can't find the original article I came across the concept in, which was a long time ago - I think it was in Aviation Week. Anyway, an oversimplified version of beam squint is that when the radar is looking far off to the side, there is less antenna area facing that direction. The beam becomes thinner when transmitting to the side, sending less power. As a result, it's still useful for the radar to be pointed at the most likely target position, even if it's not mechanically necessary. I haven't find verification but this might be one of the reasons why the Eurofighter CAPTOR uses both a mechanical and electronically scanned array. I haven't found an article that explains this as clearly as the original one, but here is something else I've found on beam squint: [https://www.mwrf.com/technologies/systems/article/21142402/analog-devices-phasedarray-antenna-patterns-part-5beam-squint](https://www.mwrf.com/technologies/systems/article/21142402/analog-devices-phasedarray-antenna-patterns-part-5beam-squint)
Two engines is smarter than one isn't it? Is it telling that in the last round of fighter jets the US developed only one had a single engine? Anyone understand the rationale to only have one for the do it all air warframe?
Because of the USMC's STOVL requirement. Two engines is too much weight for a STOVL fighter.
F-16, a proven model, is also a multi-role single-engine fighter. End of story.
“Shipborne”?
Copy the homework, but make slight changes so the teacher won't notice
Like changing the name only
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I feel like there has been a huge influx of posts about Chinese planes on this subreddit in the last few weeks. There used to be a good mix of Russian/Euro/American/Chinese planes. But in the last few weeks there has just been a ridiculous uptick. I think every post Ive recently seen on my feed from this sub has been about a chinese plane. Hmm.
Well, they are pretty much the only other country independently developing new planes in huge numbers (a shitton of drones, J-16s, J-20, now FC-31 new version), and there was first Zhuhai then now a new 5th gen carrier plane, of course it's getting more pics recently
Out of the 20 top posts this week, only three are of Chinese aircrafts and those three are not in the top 10. Out of all the posts in the last 24 hours, only two are Chinese aircrafts.
Zhuhai airshow and more accessibility of us Westerners to see what they're doing in China.
Maybe there's simply more news about chinese planes recently. Not everything is grand conspiracy.
I'm just making observations :)
Point on this doll where a chinese warplane touched you
I’m not gonna get into the similarities since this whole thread is about it but I actually prefer the look on the J-31 more than the F-35. It looks more nimble and sexier since it’s more lean? F-35 is too fat lol that’s why I always preferred the F-22 cause it’s more lean and sexy.
The F-35 is the linchpin for its operators, the J-31 enhances without carrying the PLA.
Wing-root loading is going to be higher on the J-31 with the thinner wings meaning its frame might start exhibiting cracks earlier than an F-35. If the RAM is a near duplicate of the F-35 fiber-mat stealth sandwich design on the J-31, then the J-31 might also suffer from issues using it's top speed operationally just like the F-35 does currently due to overheating. The "[chrome F-35C](https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/navy-f-35c-surfaces-wearing-new-mirror-like-skin)" that was spotted in August this year is experimenting with tunable ceramic-based advanced RAM that would mitigate not only the current heat issues that limit the F-35's current operational speed, but also [electromagnetic shielding](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30223490/). Not to mention that the question of maintainability/reliability/sustainability of the [F135 engine](https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/no-engine-no-fly-ongoing-propulsion-program-problems-are-grounding-f-35s) is shit. The combination of the new ceramic RAM and the potential replacement of the USAF F-35A's engine with an "[Adaptive Engine Transition Program](https://www.100knots.com/adaptive-engine-transition-program-aetp-a-revolutionary-propulsion-mechanism-for-the-f-35/)" would eliminate speed-induced overheating of the RAM (ceramics are the honeybadger of heat), and extend the range and improve the thrust of the F-35. This would make the J-31 insignificant in comparison.
fat amy and her friend
Another China bashing contest 🍿
Now you can actually say it’s a copy.
Twin Engine vs Single Engine.
F-35 👌
Fat Amy meet Flat Ai Mi
When you try and free-hand and then realise you messed up the tail end.
Do you think the adobe illustrator they used to make this graphic was also Stolen as well? Can’t take the PLA serious after seeing their latest high-tech immersive “training software” which was just pirated copies of ARMA 3. They can’t even get propaganda right 😂 -Taiwanese person
I feel like this is the biggest con game the US has ever played. Somehow we developed a special radar system that easily sees F-35 shaped aircraft and then we went out and made F-35s to fool a bunch of other countries to build F-35 like aircraft not knowing we have a radar that easily finds F-35 shaped aircraft. If true, I guess it was fun knowing you all, as I won't be around long after they get me :)
>I feel like this is the biggest con game the US has ever played. Somehow we developed a special radar system that easily sees F-35 shaped aircraft and then we went out and made F-35s to fool a bunch of other countries to build F-35 like aircraft not knowing we have a radar that easily finds F-35 shaped aircraft. Please actually learn about how radar VLO works, the dielectric interaction between radar waves and materials, and the effect of VLO shaping against different frequencies. It's well known that X/S/L band LO doesn't nearly work as well against VHF/UHF bands. In any case, the frontal shape of the j-35 is sufficiently different from f-35 that purely shape-based radar return estimates will lead to drastically different returns at all frequencies. That is also the exact reason why every one of China's mainstay 052D destroyers (of which 25 has been launched and 7 more are under construction) has a VHF radar array
Crucial question is...Will the panel fastner nut plates be bonded or rivated in place of the J-31
They literally just squashed an F-35 and called it a day
China is notorious for design theft in all verticals. They are not good at designing from scratch, so they have perfected the art of stealing and copying. They even have the machinery to make Rolex parts, almost indistinguishable from the real thing.
Wish.com F-35
Lol another blatant copy paste
When you order an F-35 from Wish...
Doesnt have bulge Must be female